Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-06

"C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com> Sat, 24 November 2018 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <heard@pobox.com>
X-Original-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5864130F66 for <tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:13:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=heard@pobox.com header.d=pobox.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vtbAMEeaJc-7 for <tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:13:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 865FD130F56 for <tsv-art@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:13:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D62DE3A4DC for <tsv-art@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 15:13:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from heard@pobox.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:cc :content-type; s=sasl; bh=gdMvOBchSL3W6iIjhpNiFTfUKA8=; b=dImxfV l0tY9hnBIxkWKXMf+vYAPyKg0M5Iy7QEu8p/QOtwtEfj11LgoCxL/ULR/3sSKst4 7NOoX8xhaHmev0ITJiI/flHdtm3oZan2hQgP/WLqRjOQhbnxHR/gB0qSOtYOquuK TwzuQw/HY31MdarqhKTeXUoftSQWkF67Wg0GQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:cc :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=XUvmj20wM194G95jBlAcrzbdLzhY+Yqi awvIS0Pm4JvRD/SBcEKNzJB3dmfHVLrIiCLxFz/gatvcOOwO75VgiSy9WfkPN0ry QY0O087bdY6v9STFXzjdPPjovFViWl6fRpVUCln1+n/8PHRhWu0Ew7r7m7EhT7f8 z5qxb0f2f+s=
Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85263A4DB for <tsv-art@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 15:13:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from heard@pobox.com)
Received: from mail-it1-f181.google.com (unknown [209.85.166.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5DE423A4D6 for <tsv-art@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 15:13:35 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from heard@pobox.com)
Received: by mail-it1-f181.google.com with SMTP id v11so22107895itj.0 for <tsv-art@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:13:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gKD9VGkHPJOz+sJ9HNm0RnflnmGK4KeG8ATVZBh66rZBrkVfkcb AOI+FWn0QGac5J5yGKshPNgcbWD4z9zQfq3Eha4=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:b14c:: with SMTP id s12mt19258520jah.40.1543090414177; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:13:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CACL_3VGBOP7YkVuuoE_kWebVMh73XFEGgO1HXZod_Dv1La4b3w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACL_3VGBOP7YkVuuoE_kWebVMh73XFEGgO1HXZod_Dv1La4b3w@mail.gmail.com>
From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:13:22 -0800
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CACL_3VHOryH4AcgZSgd1zMfNwxUD5HfG0VWT2kiKUDXhbyQgdg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACL_3VHOryH4AcgZSgd1zMfNwxUD5HfG0VWT2kiKUDXhbyQgdg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Scharf <michael.scharf@hs-esslingen.de>, TSV-ART <tsv-art@ietf.org>, OPSEC <opsec@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6C2A3084-F025-11E8-B064-F5C31241B9FE-06080547!pb-smtp20.pobox.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/0nagolrEV3V3uujWDIbz7_6OSYM>
Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-06
X-BeenThere: tsv-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <tsv-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsv-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsv-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 20:13:46 -0000

> On Nov 23, 2018, at 11:53 AM, Michael Scharf wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Michael Scharf
> Review result: Ready
>
> This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
> ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
> primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
> authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
> discussion list for information.
>
> When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
> review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please
> always CC tsv-art at ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.
>
> I have reviewed draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-06. There are no apparent
> transport issues. The proposed filtering could slow down the deployment of
> experimental protocols that use IPv6 options, but the tradeoffs are explained
> in the document.

Did you notice that Section 3.5.5 advises discarding IPv6 packets whose Next
Header value is unknown -- i.e., IPv6 packets with unknown EHs **or** unknown
transport protocols?  Even for an IPv6 core router in the open Internet?

If not, would that fact change your assessment of this document?

As I noted in my own last call comments, I think that a more nuanced approach
is called for (e.g., as set forth in Section 4.4.5 for unknown option values).

Mike Heard